Semi-Auto Shotgun Recoil

[ShooterSteve]

I'm not trying to be repetitive, but that buzzer is playing a big joke on you.

[busyhawk]

As you requested my vote is in reference from heavy recoil to light (in stock configurations):

#1. Saiga, in the stock configuration kicked my butt with just medium loads! Ok, I am a light ass!

#2. Benelli M1..not as hard but as others have said...never felt anything once the buzzer went off

#3. FN

#4. 1100 comp master, is a joy to shoot all day long (when it is running!)

Now remember, the original post asked for stock shotguns and not tuned. Of course there are a lot of other factors when shooting but this is a baseline anyhow. Good luck with your research. I love to read stuff like this.

Just my .02 anyhow. Objects apear smaller...

RLTW,

Scott

[CocoBolo]

Mark - Here is one of those Siag's you know the 3k ones up for sale just in time for Christmas. This isn't an endorsement because I don't know enough about them, but it looks pretty bad a to me.

http://www.brianenos.com/forums/index.php?...51&hl=saiga

[Alaskapopo]

Slowly mulling over which shotgun to use as the basis of an Open Shotgun.

The subject for today is where would you rank the various shotguns commonly used: Benelli, Remington, FNH, Saiga, and lets throwing Mossberg.

This is a baseline, so this is recoil in a stock configuration, no porting or comps.

Thanks,

Mark

The Benelli M4 kicks a lot less than the M1,2 or 3. Shot them side by side with full power slug loads and I much prefer the M4.

pat

[twodownzero]

I still don't understand why the Benelli M4 isn't more popular. 3" magnum buckshot out of it isn't hard to handle at all, it's weight can be brought down to about 7.4-7.5# unloaded, and it can hold 9 rounds if you count ghost-loading. Performance-wise it can handle down to 2.75 dram loads if you hold it tight, and they just don't break. I have never heard of an M4 breaking since benelli went to the 2-port barrels on all of them. All the other shotguns mentioned here, a quick browse turns up of incidents of breakage.

I had one and tried it. It wouldn't cycle light loads at all. I sold it before I ever found any way to shoot it reliably with birdshot.

922® concerns are the reason why most won't touch it. When I realized I was stuck with a $1200-2000 shotty that I probably couldn't lawfully install an extension on, I sold it for twice what I paid for it and bought the 1100 Compmaster.

I've not looked back since.

[11.43mm]

OP seeks dark, synthetic light recoiler--- knock yourselves out... http://zknives.com/bali/brcstgn.shtml

I should mention that I spoke with Knoxx stocks and they are working out a solution to the 1100. The formulas used for calculations are:

RI=(SM+WM+PC*CM)*MV/g*mcoef - for Recoil Impulse;

RV=g*RI/GM - for Recoil Velocity;

RE=GM*RV2/(2*g) - for Recoil Energy;

SM is shot mass in grains or gramms, SM > 0;*

WM is wad mass in grains or gramms, WM > 0;*

MV is the muzzle velocity in ft/sec or m/sec, MV > 0;*

GM is the gun mass in lb or kg, GM > 0;*

CM is the charge mass in grains grains or gramms, CM > 0;*

g is the gravitaional constant, 32.17 or 9.81;

PC is the coefficient that equals 1.5 (I assume the same value for the metric system, might be wrong);

mcoef is 7000(number of grains in lb) for english system & 1000(gramms in kg) for Metric system.

* - Only first two decimal digits are used.

[jobob]

I admit that I love my Remmies. It's an addiction! An addiction to keeping whats left of my brain from being slapped around in my skull!

I shot a friend's Benni, which he got from, uh, Benny. I did like the way the spaghetti slinger handled, but I didn't like the recoil. Why do many 3gunners go to extraordinary lengths to reduce the recoil of our lightest recoiling gun (AR), but don't seem to mind being beaten cross-eyed by our shotguns? It's one of those mysteries of nature that may never be fully answered!

[tt350z]

From my uncalibrated shoulder softest - hardest

1. 11-87

2. SX3 (What I'm currently using)

3-4. Mossberg SPX and Stoeger 2000 (It's been awhile so I don't really remember which had more kick)

Edited December 29, 2009 by tt350z

[StealthyBlagga]

...Why do many 3gunners go to extraordinary lengths to reduce the recoil of our lightest recoiling gun (AR), but don't seem to mind being beaten cross-eyed by our shotguns? It's one of those mysteries of nature that may never be fully answered!

They think a lighter shotgun that kicks more is somehow faster... just more confirmation of the effects of repeated brain trauma .

Edited December 29, 2009 by StealthyBlagga

[ShooterSteve]

I have a little math question. Running a 6 plate rack consistantly in 2.7 sec from the low ready. Takes about .7 from the buzzer to the first plate. There are 6 plates which gives 5 splits, divided among 2.0 seconds. That gives us .40 per split. The slowest shotgun out there will make that by a mile. So if I can't run it that fast, and even with tons of practice, could make a 100% improvement in my splits and got them down to .20 and cut a second off my run, would I then be out running my gun? I honestly don't know what the different cycle times are, but for me how fast the gun cycles just doesn't matter. I know that there are some people out there that can out run their guns, but they are very few, and a lot are professional shooters. So when we talk about how "fast" a gun cycles, does it really matter, or does it just make us feel better knowing that our gun is as fast as so and so's, even if we will never get there. If I can't out run the thing, I'll take the low recoil comfort into account every time.

PS- I'm switching to a single shot Stevens, cause I know it will go bang every time-and you complain about your Benelli!! Also, ya'll check my math- I ran out of fingers and toes doing the calculations...

[mpeltier]

I have a little math question. Running a 6 plate rack consistantly in 2.7 sec from the low ready. Takes about .7 from the buzzer to the first plate. There are 6 plates which gives 5 splits, divided among 2.0 seconds. That gives us .40 per split. The slowest shotgun out there will make that by a mile. So if I can't run it that fast, and even with tons of practice, could make a 100% improvement in my splits and got them down to .20 and cut a second off my run, would I then be out running my gun? I honestly don't know what the different cycle times are, but for me how fast the gun cycles just doesn't matter. I know that there are some people out there that can out run their guns, but they are very few, and a lot are professional shooters. So when we talk about how "fast" a gun cycles, does it really matter, or does it just make us feel better knowing that our gun is as fast as so and so's, even if we will never get there. If I can't out run the thing, I'll take the low recoil comfort into account every time.

PS- I'm switching to a single shot Stevens, cause I know it will go bang every time-and you complain about your Benelli!! Also, ya'll check my math- I ran out of fingers and toes doing the calculations...

Yes it matters, not because you are able to outrun it or not. The longer it takes to cycle the action the less time thats left for shooting. For example if the benelli takes .20 sec to cycle and you need .05 to get back on target for a total of .25 splits that equals 2.25 second for 9 shots. If the Remington needs .35 to cycle and the same .05 to recover it would take 3.6 seconds to shoot the same 9 targets.

My testing has shown me that noticable felt recoil is far less important than the cycle time (duration of recoil?) of the action. The 3 major players in our sport, the Benelli, Remington, and FN all have noticable recoil. It is how fast the shotgun cycles and allows you to get back on target for the next shot that matters to me. I could outrun both the remington and Benelli in practice. It never happened in competition, but the bennelli's recoil comes and goes much faster, albiet a tad more noticable. It also swings better between targets for me than either the Remington or the FN.

[irq23]

Yes it matters, not because you are able to outrun it or not. The longer it takes to cycle the action the less time thats left for shooting. For example if the benelli takes .20 sec to cycle and you need .05 to get back on target for a total of .25 splits that equals 2.25 second for 9 shots. If the Remington needs .35 to cycle and the same .05 to recover it would take 3.6 seconds to shoot the same 9 targets.

My testing has shown me that noticable felt recoil is far less important than the cycle time (duration of recoil?) of the action. The 3 major players in our sport, the Benelli, Remington, and FN all have noticable recoil. It is how fast the shotgun cycles and allows you to get back on target for the next shot that matters to me. I could outrun both the remington and Benelli in practice. It never happened in competition, but the bennelli's recoil comes and goes much faster, albiet a tad more noticable. It also swings better between targets for me than either the Remington or the FN.

The FN/Winchesters cycle faster than the Benellis...

[ShooterSteve]

So, just for general info, does anyone know the actual cycle times of the three major guns discussed. THIS IS IMPORTANT: I'm looking for ACTUAL TIMES. Not perceived times or how they feel. I would like to know. And this isn't for a "mines faster than yours" series, I'm just curious..Thanks for any info.

[irq23]

So, just for general info, does anyone know the actual cycle times of the three major guns discussed. THIS IS IMPORTANT: I'm looking for ACTUAL TIMES. Not perceived times or how they feel. I would like to know. And this isn't for a "mines faster than yours" series, I'm just curious..Thanks for any info.

They are all going to cycle at different times with different ammo. Winchester is claiming the SX3 is the fastest cycling gun when all things are the same.

[3gunpinoy]

I gotta go with Benny on this one. Lighter and faster is the way to go IMHO. I would rather have the recoil impulse of the M1 and recover faster then the "push" of the gas guns. For an open gun though, which is what this started about, having that dot never leave the target may be more important then the reliability and speed of the Benelli!

m

+1 here

I used to shoot a rem 1100 and transitioned to a M2. yes, the recoil is more perceived with the M2, but when that buzzer goes, so does you adrenaline flow. that recoil become mute and from what I think, you eventually develop into it (i.e. you loose perception of felt pain of recoil),, HOWEVER, my transitions and control of that muzzle dramatically became better and reflected higher scores. I thought it was just me, but I got 2 other people who shot Rem and transistioned to M2 and HAVE expierence the same results i did. that 3 out of 3

so it does have some performance gains, you just have to focus on your shooting performance rather than thinking about recoil.

[whiskey1]

The reason that we try to get the light kicking .223s to shoot flatter (not with less recoil neccesarily) is because we shoot two shots on the same target quite often. That is rare with the shotty. Recoil doesn't matter as much as muzzle movement and muzzle movement does not matter as much when shooting steel plates, or stationary or flying clays. FWIW, I just shot my new FN side by side with my M2 after installing a 24" VR barrel on the FN which lightened it to within probably several ounces of the weight of my M2. The muzzle of the FN still moves up and right but only about half the distance that my M2 does.

[Mike P]

None of the SGs mentioned recoil excessively. Mount the gun properly, stay in it, and recoil isn't an issue.

One thing though that can be done to reduce perceived recoil of almost any semi auto SG is to shoot all afternoon using remington express ammo in an A5. Afterwards nothing seems to have much kick.

Edited January 8, 2010 by Mike P